this an unironic flat earth server?

which meaning tho

where *which* meaning comes from

>big bang gives meaning

cringe

big bang explains early universe

tells us nothing about why the laws are the way they are, why the universe exists at all, or what should be

@ElectroquasistaticMagnetoMan pics or gtfo

what do you mean by meaning?

every *thing*

and not even really

for example

why does the fine structure constant have the value it does?

@AstralSentient you don't need to it can be justified by mathematics

science is limited

say at some point we reach the real laws of physics

we will always have the question "why these laws and not others"

there's no reason for one set of laws to govern our universe and not another set of laws

principle of sufficient reason however states everything has a reason

but science will only find us the fundamental laws

and exclude alternatives to those

question at that point stops being "how" and starts being "why"

no

not even infinite time will allow science (physics specifically) to explain that

>on boat

>using discord

wut

only in mathematics is that possible

in mathematics you end with the axioms

but science is a process of building models

you have some data and you find the simplest model that fits the data

occam's razor

the thing with science is that it doesn't give you any reason for the model

it just gives you the model that is most likely to predict observations

for example the fine structure constant

dimensionless so units are a different question

and it has a value of ~1/137

not quite but pretty close

there's no explanation for this value

it's just a fundamental constant of nature

nor something you can convert to 1 in natural units like the speed of light or planck distance

this is a dimensionless ratio with no explanation

science can go down levels

like chemistry can be explained in terms of physics

but it just pushes the problem forward

it cannot answer "why is reality this way and not another way"

because the data is just observed and the models are effectively compression algorithms

newton's first law cannot be a theory

it's an approximation

with pure math you can get a full explanation

because it ends with "we assumed it in the axioms"

and mathematics with different axioms is still mathematics

so really it's validity that is universal

but in science you don't have all possibilities occurring

you have observations and you fit a *specific* mathematical model to them

there's no sufficient reason behind that particular model other than fit to observations

math is not science

at least not what i'm calling science

science here means "application of inductive inference to the observed world"

math has nothing to do with the outside world

a man in a sensory deprivation chamber with no senses could still do mathematics if motivated and if he had the memory

yes

QM for example

is a specific model

*specific* mathematical structure

a part of mathematics selected out of all the rest

for no reason than it fits observations

yes QM is science

but QM is not mathematics

because it is a specific mathematical structure fit to observations

not the general study of mathematical structures

QM is more linear algebra really

calculus for the infinite dimensions only

>what

science uses mathematical structures

but science is not mathematics

mathematics studies all mathematical structures

physics selects mathematical structures that fit observations

yes physics uses *specific mathematical structures*

it is not mathematics

no

applying mathematics does not make a thing mathematics

mathematics deals with mathematical structures in general

regardless of whether they fit observations or not

this is why mathematics can be certain

because it doesn't require verification by observation

the mathematical structures are studied by mathematicians just for the fun of it

their physical relevance is uninteresting

for physicists they only use the mathematical structures that fit what is actually observed

for example physicists aren't going to be messing with conway's game of life

because the universe is obviously not a 2d grid

nor does it use the manhattan norm

lol

did i say you cherry pick mathematical structures that fit your beliefs?

i said you pick mathematical structures that fit *observations*

bye lol

ez

science is the application of inductive inference to sensory observations

because it's trying to figure stuff out about external reality